Why can Cavaliers use two weapons unpromoted

[Emperor Hardin]

Make no mistake, I like cavaliers but sometimes I think they're a little too good. Cavaliers already have high movement, very balanced stats, and canto, so why add weapon triangle control to their already impressive arsenal?

In FE1, Pegasus and Armor Knights could also use two weapons so I'm wondering why the series has never revisited this? In many games, Armor Knights could do with more advantages like being able to use two weapons before promotion. I think the Tellius games had the right idea by getting rid of Lance/Sword Cavaliers to instead have single weapon variations.

[Excellen Browning]

Because cavaliers are just cool like that. (and because it's historically accurate I suppose)

[Espinosa]

I think access to weapon types isn't even such a huge advantage for Cavs, as seen in Seth (lost axes but turned out to perform far better than Marcus and his other predecessors) for example. Even in PoR where Cavs were stuck to one weapon type until promotion they didn't mind it terribly (though Astrid and Makalov wanted a promotion ASAP) and Canto after attacking made them stronger than ever before.

Perhaps in the case of the GBA games the game designers knew efficiency players would rely on Cavaliers for a fast completion of the game and therefore added more options in terms of what weapon type to master so that more variation between playthroughs would be involved. It also contributes to decision-making, e.g. do you want Marcus to get to D axes for Hammer/Halberd access, or focus on C swords for Killing Edges? Or, in the DS remakes, do you want to use better swords like Armorslayer and Killing Edge or to be able to counter at 1-2 range with Javelin? Since the other advantages of using a Cavalier make them superior to the majority of the available characters anyway, you have more opportunities so that it's more fun to play.

[secondworld]

I also like what IS did with cavs/paladins in the tellius games, they really should've just kept it like that.

As for pegasus knights and armor knights using lances AND swords, I have no idea why they never brought that back. Having swords would allow peg knight to survive for more than one round against axe users, and armor knights with more than one weapon could choke points more effectively.

[Gone2Ground]

Thematic accuracy, I think. Sometimes you have to sacrifice the balance of the game to make it feel good. Besides, even if you do pull an FE9/10 for all of them the Cavalier would still be one of the best units in the game, so why not encourage people who don't understand the whole move-again bonus (new players) to use them?

[Fei Mao]

Kinda like Daigoji said I would assume from a different perspective that there's a weapon for charging(lances) and a weapon for fighting people close to the rider. (swords)

Gameplay wise: Like people already said versatility as for the pegasus and armor things I guess the designers thought that if cavaliers already can use multiple weapons it would be redundant if pegasus and armors can get multiple weapons. IMO

[BlueLore]

I think it may be because we've got already several tier 1 units who can only use lances(pegasus riders,wyvern riders in eralier games,knights and soldiers) and making them sword only users alsos seems not that good as the lance matches the cavalier better.

This way they simply are more unique compared to other tier 1 classes.

[Jotari]

Because cavaliers are just cool like that. (and because it's historically accurate I suppose)

Given the nature of the Troubador class, I really don't think historically accuracy is high on their list of concerns.

[Renall]

I'm really fine with there being the following:

• "Specialist" classes such as Swordmasters/Snipers/Halberdiers/Berserkers/Dark Mages who have only one weapon but receive some considerable bonus for their specialization (seems to be stuff like crit bonuses usually).
  
• "Versatile" classes such as Paladins/Warriors/Sages/the various hybrids in Awakening. Two weapons for WTC control (or staff utility) as well as usually some other advantages.
  
• "Generalist" classes with full WTC control like Great Knights/Generals. Ideally, Generals would have access to all/most weapons before promotion to allow them to work those up.

Basically, I'd say leave Cavaliers alone but give Armor Knights all three melee weapons before promotion, and maybe Bows after Jugdral-style. That skill somebody dreamed up to auto-switch would also be nifty, then at least they can leverage their WTC control while defending like is supposed to be their niche.

[Sasori]

I don't mind having cavalries with both swords and lances it kind of fits them. I would however be in favour of nerfing them a little bit since mounted classes are pretty much always extremely good (especially in Por). I mean they have weapon triangle controll, good stats and sometimes caps, canto and higher movement.

I don't really know how they should do that though. Perhaps just make them a little worse statisticly so they actually need the higher move and weapon triangle controll instead of it making already good units even better.

[Rehab]

I imagine an attempt to make them more realistic, if they decided that was the intention, might have them do damage proportional to their momentum/the number of spaces they moves before attacking, like in Mount and Blade. I can't say I know how that'd actually play out ingame in Fire Emblem's case, though.

[Icon of Sin]

I imagine an attempt to make them more realistic, if they decided that was the intention, might have them do damage proportional to their momentum/the number of spaces they moves before attacking, like in Mount and Blade. I can't say I know how that'd actually play out ingame in Fire Emblem's case, though.

Berwick Saga did that with most Spears and Lances.

For instance : Mythril Spear is 13 + 1H (H is hex). If you move 5 squares, that would be 13 + 5.

Lances have lower initial might but get powered up a lot more by hexes crossed, for example the basic Lance is 5 + 3H.

The bonus damage is of course only applied on the first hit and if you initiate the fight.

Edited January 3, 2013 by Dio

[Renall]

Berwick Saga did that with most Spears and Lances.

For instance : Mythril Spear is 13 + 1H (H is hex). If you move 5 squares, that would be 13 + 5.

Lances have lower initial might but get powered up a lot more by hexes crossed, for example the basic Lance is 5 + 3H.

The bonus damage is of course only applied on the first hit and if you initiate the fight.

It's funny, because I can totally see giving spears a damage bonus when defending depending on how far the enemy moved as well, to represent spear walling a charge. Maybe only for foot spearmen vs. mounted units though.

[Icon of Sin]

It's funny, because I can totally see giving spears a damage bonus when defending depending on how far the enemy moved as well, to represent spear walling a charge. Maybe only for foot spearmen vs. mounted units though.

I agree that it would be a neat idea for spear using infantrymen of all kinds, but sadly FE isn't too big defensive combat other than "don't attack this dude or else you're going to kill him on EP and face another dude that will kill you".

Sadly, FE as it stands is based too much on offensive objectives like rout, seize and escape. There's not enough defend missions in each game to make good use of this, and even then some can be completed before the defense has been successful by killing the commander. A more defensively oriented game probably wouldn't have Archers and Armors as the seldom used classes if they can use tools given to them more often.

[PKL]

The least thing I want is another FE7...defend missions every other chapter isnt that fun

[Excellen Browning]

It's funny, because I can totally see giving spears a damage bonus when defending depending on how far the enemy moved as well, to represent spear walling a charge. Maybe only for foot spearmen vs. mounted units though.

Against cav maybe. Spearwalls were only useful when there was no getting around themand if there were lots of spears. So if the game sees a unit as one guy, then the idea that cav can't go around a single stationary spear and attack from the side would be silly. Spearwalls are always useless against infrantry though.

[Renall]

Against cav maybe. Spearwalls were only useful when there was no getting around themand if there were lots of spears. So if the game sees a unit as one guy, then the idea that cav can't go around a single stationary spear and attack from the side would be silly. Spearwalls are always useless against infrantry though.

Well the problem is if we bring realism into it then Paladins should basically run down every foot unit without fail because heavy cavalry just does that to isolated infantrymen. Having some kind of "joust bonus" or "stand ground bonus" is fine as a potential neat thing, but one could certainly go too far with it if one starts demanding too much realism out of it.

[Jotari]

This is a series where you can shoot magic fire balls from the back of a winged horse. Really let's not worry too much about realism.

[Anouleth]

Sadly, FE as it stands is based too much on offensive objectives like rout, seize and escape. There's not enough defend missions in each game to make good use of this, and even then some can be completed before the defense has been successful by killing the commander. A more defensively oriented game probably wouldn't have Archers and Armors as the seldom used classes if they can use tools given to them more often.

If it's true that archers would be better if there were more defend chapters, why are archers awful in FE7 (which has many defend chapters), and decent in FE4, FE6, and FE12 which are 100% seize chapters?

And surely, shouldn't archers be much worse in defend chapters because, y'know, they can't actually defend themselves? Surely, a unit who cannot do anything on enemy phase is going to be really bad in a chapter that is all about surviving enemy phases?

[Espinosa]

And surely, shouldn't archers be much worse in defend chapters because, y'know, they can't actually defend themselves? Surely, a unit who cannot do anything on enemy phase is going to be really bad in a chapter that is all about surviving enemy phases?

It all depends on what the chapters are like. If defence chapters involve protecting yourself from enemies attacking you from the other side of the wall, then a unit with ranged attacks that are more accurate than Javelins/Hand Axes and who has more defence/HP than mage units is very helpful indeed.

Edited January 4, 2013 by Espinosa

[Excellen Browning]

Well the problem is if we bring realism into it then Paladins should basically run down every foot unit without fail because heavy cavalry just does that to isolated infantrymen. Having some kind of "joust bonus" or "stand ground bonus" is fine as a potential neat thing, but one could certainly go too far with it if one starts demanding too much realism out of it.

You could switch them to being light cavalry but that doesn't solve the problem because light lancers would still run down any and every infantry. Honestly the way to go for this would be to pepper cavalry with arrows.

[Anouleth]

It all depends on what the chapters are like. If defence chapters involve protecting yourself from enemies attacking you from the other side of the wall, then a unit with ranged attacks that are more accurate than Javelins/Hand Axes and who has more defence/HP than mage units is very helpful indeed.

If the enemies are on the other side of a wall, why fight them at all? Why does having more HP/DEF matter if the enemies are seperated from you by a wall and you can move out of their range at any time?

[Espinosa]

If the enemies are on the other side of a wall, why fight them at all? Why does having more HP/DEF matter if the enemies are seperated from you by a wall and you can move out of their range at any time?

If the enemies have nobody to attack, they'll start chipping away at breakable walls, which is far more threatening to the rest of your units. Having somebody damaged is also one of the few ways how your clerics can get experience and reach promotion in a reasonable amount of time.

[Rehab]

There's Total War, where each unit is like an actual army unit composed of a buncha dudes, which can make getting a unit composed of horses into an enemy fortification a nigh-suicidal pain in the ass if their only openings are cramped doors, giving the defending archer groups ample time to shoot them as they trickle through. Maybe that'd translate to requiring a lot of movement points for mounts to pass through a space only a couple squares wide, or a movement penalty when passing through friendly units, especially other mounts.

Admittedly that's another >realsim thing, but I think it's at least possible to communicate with the mechanics FE already has.

Berwick Saga did that with most Spears and Lances.For instance : Mythril Spear is 13 + 1H (H is hex). If you move 5 squares, that would be 13 + 5.Lances have lower initial might but get powered up a lot more by hexes crossed, for example the basic Lance is 5 + 3H.The bonus damage is of course only applied on the first hit and if you initiate the fight.

Oh neat, danke for the info. I really need to try Berwick out sometime.

The least thing I want is another FE7...defend missions every other chapter isnt that fun

If the enemy could climb walls or had a shitload of breakable areas to get through, such that guarding chokepoints was still the best option to keep the enemy at bay but the player also had to keep an eye on threats potentially coming from anywhere, I think the defense chapters could be quite fun. Might just be me, but some of the siege defense chapters I played in TW: Shogun 2 were among the most tense and exhilarating parts of the game to me, surprisingly enough.

Edited January 5, 2013 by Rehab

[Icon of Sin]

If it's true that archers would be better if there were more defend chapters, why are archers awful in FE7 (which has many defend chapters), and decent in FE4, FE6, and FE12 which are 100% seize chapters?

And surely, shouldn't archers be much worse in defend chapters because, y'know, they can't actually defend themselves? Surely, a unit who cannot do anything on enemy phase is going to be really bad in a chapter that is all about surviving enemy phases?

To be fair, FE7 doesn't have many options that advantage Archers like height advantage in games like FE10 or TRS. Only one defend map, Kinship's Bond, has ballistae, but they start closer to the enemies. Then you have to take into account the strength of the player units agaisnt the enemies, where FE7 enemies are relatively easier to defeat compared to FE6 or FE12, making archery especially valuable in those games as chip damage. Both of them also happen to have lower quality throwing weapons and a fairly high density of flyers in numerous chapters. FE12 then brings reclass in the picture, allowing any random promoted unit to gain an automatic and valuable C Bows as a Sniper. As for FE4, I suppose Ichival is part of the equation, but since they lack a horse I don't think they're considered that good. They do have better class base stats and an automatic Pursuit.

A chapter like 3-13 in FE10 would be a good example of a defend chapter where Archers are valuable. Of course, if you deny perks like ballistae that you can actually use and height advantage to your Archers, they're not going to be doing that great, though even a chapter similar to this one with neither ballistae or height advantage is good for Archers if they can have someone else choke the points for them.

Oh neat, danke for the info. I really need to try Berwick out sometime.

I wonder when a serious translating project is going to happen with this one. That and I guess not everyone can run a PS2 emulator very well.